Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ernst Scheufele

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to List of World War II flying aces. Merge target subject to editorial judgement Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:30, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ernst Scheufele

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Minor aviation biography which fails WP:GNG. The article has been practically untouched since 2016. Although there are sources to attest to ES's existence, he has received no "significant coverage". —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete although he was an Ace which is generally sufficient for notability but there doesn't appear to be SIGCOV in multiple RS to satisfy WP:GNG and it lacks even the most basic biographical details. Mztourist (talk) 03:45, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Although there are a few sentences of coverage here and here, there's nothing resembling GNG that I can locate. Should be merged to List_of_World_War_II_flying_aces where he doesn't currently have an entry.(t · c) buidhe 16:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Jagdgeschwader 5 and encourage research using the sources for that article to find additional details.--Concertmusic (talk) 00:07, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Brigade Piron:, please see WP:NOEFFORT - "practically untouched since 2016" is not a reason to delete an article. There's plenty of reasons this shouldn't be an article but this isn't one of them. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Bushranger:, nice to you practising WP:AGF. I am aware that it is not a consideration but think it is still interesting context in this discussion. This is why I wrote: "Although there are sources to attest to ES's existence, he has received no "significant coverage". —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Kolma8 (talk) 10:34, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.